At this point, enough people still do care.

Another good point. I didn't experience that myself, but I have heard the stories.

Agreed.

AI is a tool the skilled author uses. It does not replace him.

Very well said.

This is true, most of the things people call "AI" are just what used to be called expert systems and pathing algorithms that happen to have the kind of memory and processing speed available we could only dream about when I was taking COBOL programming classes and using BASIC to write text adventures.

Glad to know I made sense.

An understandable plight, to be sure. It kind of reminds me of another description I heard of AI art. This one likened AI generation to pulling the lever on a slot machine where the best result you can hope for is "close enough" or "I guess that'll have to do". Not going to lie, I would be curious to hear the various "fails", just out of that aforementioned morbid curiosity.

Oh, it's not wrong to like them. Personally, I don't think they're that bad (though nowhere near as good as LOTR adaptations). Still, history is history, and for these purposes, it must be pointed out how they were received at the time.

@@omniviewer2115 True.

Regarding earlier versions of 3D, I suppose those slipped my mind. Even so, it's a method of watching movies that comes in waves has yet to actually last. It's cool that you still have your 3D TV, but I'd be willing to bet you're one of the few. Regarding your concern of AI content inundating places like KZfaq, that doesn't concern me as much. It could be a short-term problem, but not necessarily a long-term one. It's a question of quality over quantity. 100 bags of pork rinds is not on the same level as one slow-cooked loin of pulled pork. People might be content to snack on the former for a spell, but they will inevitably crave something more substantial and move on to the latter. Don't believe me? Look at what's been happening recently with superhero movies. They had one heck of a run for a genre that used to be so scarce in cinema. Recently, though, the lack of good content from the medium (with only a handful of exceptions) has caused people to drift away, and now they're looking for entertainment that provides something different, like OPPENHEIMER or GODZILLA MINUS ONE, or even returning to the Classics. Or look at Internet critics themselves. When the Angry Video Game Nerd and Nostalgia Critic got the ball rolling, they drew attention because they were being crass, vulgar, and disgusting in ways that you simply didn't see in even the edgiest mainstream media. That was fresh and new for a while, and a lot of people followed suit, but that didn't last. The shock of excessive cursing and scatological images gradually wore off, and in order to keep going, these same critics had to adapt quickly. Many began adding more thoughtful elements amongst all the jokes, some abandoning humor entirely. Other tried making the leap to producing their own feature films or series. Those who had real talent (and thick skin) were able to continue. Those whose potty mouths could form no other words of meaning faded away, trendy no longer. AI content is already met with sideways glances, and it hasn't even really taken over yet. People using it to make stuff quickly might churn out a lot of stuff, but it's not stuff with any staying power because there's nothing beneath the surface. Think about that one subplot in SANTA CLAUS THE MOVIE, where a contest is held to determine if Santa's Workshop should remain artisanal or go fully automated. Initially, it looks like automation wins because the machine builds more toys at a faster rate, but those same toys end up falling apart. Quantity was prioritized over quality, and the results spoke for themselves. Maybe the machine still has a use - the novelization implies that a balance will be struck between hand-crafting and machine-crafting - but it will not be replacing anyone in the long run. That's how I see it, anyway. AI could be a short term nemesis in the world of Arts and Entertainment, but it won't be a long term one.

I hope to God that you're right.

That's assuming AI will still be used this way in 10 years. Anything can happen.

That last part you describe can be chalked up simple hubris of man. The people who think they can succeed where Frankenstein failed are the people who don't think Frankenstein is about them.

has been beckoned.

That comes with its own complications. How you do keep from getting distracted? What if the connection has negative side effects? Can your interface be hacked? Those are just the ones that come to mind.

Yeah, my description of Avatar as "the most forgettable movie that people can't stop talking about" is meant in jest. Aside from the 3D aspect, though, it's definitely not Cameron's strongest work, which makes it all the more baffling that he doesn't want to do anything else anymore.

@omniviewer2115 I agree cameron has definitely made better that's for sure. Like he has made movies better than avatar and yet avatar gets so much focus. Again I don't have beef with avatar but still quite strange.

Has liverwurst.

Think about the full context of what I said, in which this hypothetical film is produced entirely by a studio executive with little-to-no input from human cast and crewmembers. It has been shown time and again that many producers, especially these days, don't know the first thing about what makes a good movie, as exemplified by the multitude of films of the "corporate cash grab" variety. As such, a producer who uses AI to generate a completed movie would only have their own perception of what constitutes quality, and the end result would reflect that. It's already a problem with people who rely entirely on AI, who largely appear to lack an eye for quality control. Ergo, such a film has a higher chance of being terrible than it has of being good. Even if it somehow succeeds and Hollywood moves forward with AI, that first success will be a fluke, and just like Avatar with its 3D tech, it won't be tolerated by audiences for long. Plus, as I've pointed out in the past, people are not universally enamored with AI. An entire category of backlash against Marvel's Secret Invasion was based solely on how AI was used for the opening titles, and there's a vocal resistance against the idea. Those who are enamored with it are very likely to lose interest because people can only be enamored with flashy pictures for so long. Eventually , they'll crave substance, and only humans can truly provide the kind of substance that will satisfy.

@@omniviewer2115 Great clarification! I can be a bit over reactive at times, but I get the context much better now. In fact, I literally hate this stuff the more I think about it lol

No one has been “enamored” with ai storytelling. “Written by ChatGPT” or “this feels like ai” has in fact become the most go-to hackneyed criticism of bad writing in the past year.

@@Appleboxman True, but clarification on my end, I was talking more about current A I visuals, than current storytelling A I storytelling. I know lots of folks blown away with what A I artwork is churning out atm, case in point the woman walking the Tokyo street is very compelling, especially with how quickly it was produced.

@@ronniepatterson2827 I mean, I don't know how many times people are going to be duped? it's overfitting on stock footage. in response to prompts that ask it to do something well outside the means of its dataset, it looks like garbage. this has already been demonstrated by the people promoting it, and it hasn't even gone public yet. "ai" has always been smoke and mirrors.

I was just thinking as I took my self-driving flying car back from the lunar colony to my home in the underwater state of Florida so I could enjoy a meal made in my fully-automated kitchen that predictions about the future always come true. Then I realized that was all just in the physical book I was reading about what life would be like in the year 2000. The future is not set in stone.

I hate how true this is.

@@MataNui. You mean the original comment? Is it really true? Don't forget that Walmart was supposed to have done away completely with cashiers only a couple of years ago, but go to one now and only a few self-checkout stations remain. All those jobs were supposed to be gone forever, so either forever isn't as long as we've been told, or the futurists were wrong yet again.

@@omniviewer2115 oh don't get me wrong, I don't even think AI needs to be doing half the things we're having it do.

"by not using the tool you do it yourself you're like samurai saying that you won't use guns it doesn't matter what you believe you will be destroyed." The funny thing is we're still talking about those samurai to this very day. Even if their time came to an end, they're remembered, and even respected. "if you guys cared and wanted to do something you'd be like we need to use AI art to maintain creativity because we're creative people" Creative people don't need a machine to be creative for them. That's what makes us creative.

I thought it was Fern Gully in space?

And animals in general too